Punjab-Haryana High Court
Surinder Singh vs Himachal Pradesh And Others on 13 January, 2011
Author: K. Kannan
Bench: K. Kannan
FAO No.573 of 1997 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
FAO No.573 of 1997
Date of decision January 13 , 2011
Surinder Singh
....... Appellant
Versus
Himachal Pradesh and others
........Respondents
FAO No.574 of 1997
Swaran Singh
....... Appellant
Versus
Himachal Pradesh and others
........Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
Present:- None for the appellant.
Mr. L. M. Suri, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate
for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
None for respondent No.3.
****
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?
K. Kannan, J (oral).
1. The case is of the year 1997 and there is no appearance on behalf of the appellant at the time when the matter is called. I do not want to detain the case for long for an adjournment nor do I want to dismiss the case for default. I hasten to examine the records with the assistance of the learned Senior counsel and to proceed pass the following FAO No.573 of 1997 2 order.
2. Both the cases arise out of awards passed for injury sustained by the claimants. FAO No.573 is a claim for enhancement of compensation granted to the claimant Surinder Singh and FAO No.574 of 1997 is for compensation for injuries caused to the claimant Swarn Singh. While determining the compensation the Tribunal had awarded Rs.35,000/- under the following heads:
Rs.6,000/- For medical expenses
Rs.9,000/- For loss of income
Rs.2,400/- For attendant
Rs.5,000/- For pain and suffering
Rs.12,000/- For loss of income, enjoyment
Rs.1,500/- For nutritious died
Rs.1,200/- For transportation
3. The doctor had been examined as PW3 who gave evidence to the effect that the claimant had suffered fracture of the pelvic bone and he had been referred to PGI for treatment on 5.12.1993 and that he found disability at 27%. The disability certificate had been exhibited as Ex.PW-3/A. The claimant had contended that he was an agriculturist and that he was hospitalized for four days and later he could not do any work for two months. The Tribunal had provided for head of claim for compensation including future loss of earning capacity at Rs.2,000/- and the loss of income during the period of his treatment at Rs.9,000/-. All the heads of claim have been properly adverted to by the Tribunal.
4. As regards the claim for enhancement which is subject matter of appeal No.574 of 1997 the Tribunal has awarded the following amounts as compensation:-
Rs.6,000/- For medical expenses
FAO No.573 of 1997 3
Rs.9,000/- For loss of income
Rs.2,400/- For attendant
Rs.5,000/- For pain and suffering
Rs.12,000/- For loss of income, enjoyment
Rs.1,500/- For nutritious diet
Rs.1,200/- For transportation
The evidence of the doctor was that he had found that there was fracture of oliecranon of the left elbow and that he had been advised surgery and that the doctor had assessed disability at 27% which I would understand disability of the arm. While determining compensation, the Tribunal has assessed Rs.12,000/- towards loss of income and enjoyment and Rs.9,000/- for loss of income during the period of treatment. The over all compensation of Rs.35,000/- by the Tribunal accords with evidence and in both the cases I do not find any reason for interference.
(K. KANNAN) JUDGE Jaunary 13, 2011 archana